NOTATIO

I'm working on a (choral) piece that has a huge number of enharmonic changes, such as: They are occur frequently throughout the score, and the music is quite closely spaced. There are lyrics below, and a lot of dynamics above.

I'm wondering how I might indicate the enharmonic changes in some way. The usual method of small bracketed noteheads will just make matters worse, I think.

I was thinking of possibly bracketing the whole note.
Other options would be some sort of symbol above the note, I suppose. Or perhaps a line from one note to the other?
(You can't gliss to the same note! )

Actually, I quite like the line, though I suppose the angle does suggest "down". Unless anyone has any better ideas?

Bracketing the note often means to tacet or "ghost" it, so I wouldn't be inclined to use that. Gould shows a bracketed cue-sized stemless notehead on page 437 if you like that style.

My first reaction was the same as Fred’s. Both proposed solutions create more questions than answers because of their contradictions. I find this is one of those situations where there is no good solution, so it’s best to keep it simple and clear.

Once you recognize the enharmonic, the line is very singable as originally written; however, I fully accept that’s not ideal for sight-reading. It’s simply the clearest from several bad options.

Fred G. Unn wrote: ↑07 Jan 2024, 18:10 Bracketing the note often means to tacet or "ghost" it, so I wouldn't be inclined to use that. Gould shows a bracketed cue-sized stemless notehead on page 437 if you like that style.

Yes, that's the usual convention, but as said, adding little noteheads everywhere is going to confuse just as much; and there's not much space.

What about this?
I guarantee that everyone will mark something in to indicate this!

Perhaps an equal sign as a Line? Might be confused for some type of tremolo though.

benwiggy wrote: ↑07 Jan 2024, 18:52 Yes, that's the usual convention, but as said, adding little noteheads everywhere is going to confuse just as much; and there's not much space.

What about this?

Screenshot.png

I guarantee that everyone will mark something in to indicate this!

That's not too bad!

However, I'm always worried that something like this will cause a hand to go up at rehearsal. Text "enharmonic" or "enharm." may clarify better than "=", but space and clutter are indeed an issue.

@Fred G. Unn I think you're right about the angled "=" being confused with a tremolo. Seeing that makes me question what is intended.

I wouldn't invent anything. Home grown notations are rarely advisable. Better to go with Gould:

Yes, but as said, in a closely packed texture, I think that's going to add clutter and confusion.

It's a beautiful piece of German Romanticism, but the notation is absolutely bonkers. 5 flats, but riddled with sharps, seemingly to make intervals more obvious, rather than 'vertical' harmonic reasons. I'm actually thinking about re-spelling the whole thing....

benwiggy wrote: ↑08 Jan 2024, 07:55 I'm actually thinking about re-spelling the whole thing....

If that’s an option it’s probably the best way to go.

Would you want to share more about this piece? Composer, a URL if available online, or an excerpt, if not?